You are currently viewing PlanetSide Universe as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features.
By joining our web site you will have access to post topics in our public forums, communicate privately with other members via PM, request TeamSpeak access and more! Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, join the forums today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Server running costs wouldn't be earth shattering (iirc PS1 could run on a Pentium II as server hardware) and you've got a Community Council thing running, so NDA contracts already exist and people drafting and determining contracts are already hired, contracts would just have to be expanded a bit. So administration is covered as well.

When you run the game mostly with volunteer enthusiasts, your development costs are non-existent.

Regarding the transfer and investment, theoretically it is possible to ask former PS1-devs if they would be interested in helping to run it as a hobby project for a few hours a week or month, with a share of any profits made. Whether they'd be interested, I don't know. IIRC a number of PS1-devs left SOE somewhat disheartened, but they might just love the game enough to be interested if they got carte blanche to do with it as they'd see fit.

If you could get those folks interested, the investment would be a lot lower. And of course, GMs could have a similar structure.

Currently though, PS1 makes no money at all. So all you stand in losing is a one time investment. :/ Me, I'd make some calls to devs. Hell, if you could just get me the contact details of former devs and a detailed "this is as far as you'd be allowed to go", I'd contact them for you.

I'm unaware of any community council on Planetside 2. I'm not a designer, so I might be a bit out of the loop. And I haven't heard of us using any sort of NDA on Planetside in a loooong time.

Asking devs to work for free is a huge task. Most people don't like working for free, usually you have to offer them money. And getting devs outside the company into a place where they could work for free would be effort on Daybreak's part.

Unfortunately I will not provide any contact details of former devs. I barely know any of them. If you happen to find any on your own, go ahead and shoot them an email/tweet/what-have-you.

I understand you are very passionate about Planetside, but what you want might not be possible, at least right now. Maybe one day.

I'm unaware of any community council on Planetside 2. I'm not a designer, so I might be a bit out of the loop. And I haven't heard of us using any sort of NDA on Planetside in a loooong time.

We had several people on the Community Council for PlanetSide since 2010. Did it for three years myself. Unfortunately we didn't get to chat to devs at the time.

Asking devs to work for free is a huge task. Most people don't like working for free, usually you have to offer them money. And getting devs outside the company into a place where they could work for free would be effort on Daybreak's part.

Unfortunately I will not provide any contact details of former devs. I barely know any of them. If you happen to find any on your own, go ahead and shoot them an email/tweet/what-have-you.

Heh well yeah I can imagine it would be and fully understand you don't (nor expected you to) share that sort of thing (right away) anyway. Besides, there'd need to be a company plan, though of course, it would be possible to first see if there'd be interest among former devs to work on it in their off-hours before even considering such a plan.

I very much doubt they would come together anywhere any time soon though. I'd more imagine a sort of "work from home" situation, whenever they'd feel like it (but being offered the chance to if they would want to) and organise themselves. Meh.

I wonder how the people who work on Europa Universalis IV MEIOU Mods work together on it. I presume through dropbox type setups.

I understand you are very passionate about Planetside, but what you want might not be possible, at least right now. Maybe one day.

So, they aim on saving the 80-100BR bracket while the 1-79 are quitting left and right.

They have yet to provide compelling reasons to level up to BR 80 in the first place (much less BR100). They gave means to but no good reasons for. As it is, it's all gun levelling/grinding.

That's like handing someone tools and telling them 'climb that mountain' without giving any reasons why.

Besides, the reasons why those 80-100 BR are still playing is because they
- are a newbie hardcore grinder
- are die hard veterans
- content with the current grinding/farming 'meta'.

Those who already quit or quit at low levels obviously don't find it attractive. Hence, why focus on those who are already content?

So, instead of that they ought to focus on reimplementing a sound and foundational Resource System. The same mechanics that players have been waiting for since June (?) last year. The same resource mechanics they unduly destroyed for the sake of the Directive system.

But currently, the Wishlist ideas they present are simply bunk, backwards and out of touch.

A good resource mechanic will:

- give players who quit a reason to come back give it another go.
- give new players reason to stay in the first place.
- be inviting to BR 1 - 100 and not just on (80-100BR . Why?)

And lastly, to be exact.
- Allowing players to switch side is not in the spirit of faction warfare. Allowing an account to access is already bad as it is. Now they are literally just treating it as a lobby shooter. This is an MMO not a Lobby multiplayer game. Why use FPS as inspiration or standard?

It's like PS2 is trying to build that tallest building but they end up with deep ditch and the building buried in with only 4 floors showing because that what the other FPS are 4 floors only.

"We made the tallest building ever!"
"Where is it?"
"Here it is, buried with only 4 floors showing"
"Whyyy?"
"Look around you, every one has 4 floors only. We still have the tallest building though. Only it is buried". Planetside 2 logic

Why make the only modern MMOFPS if you are aiming to build a Lobby FPS shooter?????

- Resetting levels is also inane because players will not sacrifice all their levels unless they are given a something really useful for it, like power.

Example: In a very old MMO Shaiya. Getting players to max level at Normal mode unlocks Hard Mode (which is more powerful). Maxing a Hard Mode player unlocks Ultimate Mode (which is extremely powerful, but the downside is it Permadeath and cash shop dependent to maintain). Players did anyway despite the gut-wrenching Permadeath mechanic, because the pvp was great with open PvPvE high-end dungeons (no instanced garbage) and contestable access to high end maps.

So unless, they give something like more power. Players arent' going to reroll with that kind of system.

A lot of people ask us to do stuff for free, or at a loss, for stuff like that. If we were all rich and making money hand over fist, it would be much easier to get us to do stuff like that.

I hear ya, if i would make that money i'd probably start my own planetside knock-off.

The thing is though, studios usually moderate the stuff they're running on their servers. And quite frankly, that is to be expected. I mean PS1 is after all an official SOE product, isn't it?
Letting PS1 run completely unmoderated just looks bad, the game looks and feels like a crappy emulated server, and everyone who sees or experiences that can get a bad picture of the whole studio that way (I know a couple of people who reacted like that when i showed them PS1; "SOE is letting PS1 run like...THIS? Wow...").

I know making it free was supposed to be a nice move (while also saving costs), and i absolutely appreciate the sentiment behind that, don't get me wrong.
But seeing PS1 in its current state - "Party drops", no Core Combat, hackers you cannot do anything about - and all in an official SOE game...well man, i'm being brutally honest here, you might aswell just have pulled the plug.
If you can't properly maintain a game, then don't do it non-properly.

Tl;dr: Money or not, bloody moderate the stuff you're letting run on your official servers. Or work out a deal with people like Figment so we can moderate it for you.

So, they aim on saving the 80-100BR bracket while the 1-79 are quitting left and right.

The other two items on our wishlist are aimed at helping new players. The BR unlocks give them goals to work towards every session they log in. The facility missions will guide them along a base capture. And Then there's Koltyr which is all about acclimating and helping new players.

The other two items on our wishlist are aimed at helping new players. The BR unlocks give them goals to work towards every session they log in. The facility missions will guide them along a base capture. And Then there's Koltyr which is all about acclimating and helping new players.

It seems late to introduce NPE improvements for the PC side at this time. Although I suppose the old adage "better late than never" applies. I would surmise this is mostly oriented towards the PS4 launch. Which is fine since a lot of experience was gained from the past 2 years of PS2 on PC and I won't go down that road of "we have just been beta testing for the console" but I am sure many still hold that belief. I really hope the game does well on the PS4!

The other two items on our wishlist are aimed at helping new players. The BR unlocks give them goals to work towards every session they log in. The facility missions will guide them along a base capture. And Then there's Koltyr which is all about acclimating and helping new players.

1) I also wish that those are enough. I'm not being sarcastic or ironic, I really do hope that.

But I have my reservations whether those are sufficient in remedying Planetside 2's systemic problem. What do I mean by that? It simply meant that PS2 deficiency in player experience is that much deeper than being covered with a band-aid like solutions (and again, that doesn't mean PS2 Devs' attempts at helping newbies is not welcome).

But to elaborate, Planetside 2 has:
- Four full continents (and the incoming newbie area Koltyr).
- up to 100 bases in each continent
- these bases are intricately connected by a lattice system
- these bases varying in size and difficulty in capture

If one is to tell that to any gamer not familiar with PS2, the impression will be is game is well thought-out and planned. But upon actual downloading and playing the game. Here's what they are met with:

Lattice system is pointless - What determines if one is to take an A-B path, instead of A-C or A-D?

Answer: Whatever is good for the farm.

There is no logic to the lanes. In addition to that, the redeploy system allows players to jump around to capture empty bases. The game degenerates into whether redeploying enmasse will stop 48+ attackers from trying to ninja an empty bases.

Bases are meaningless - What determines which base to capture? What determines which bases to save? What determines which bases to prioritize?

Answer: Whatever is good for the farm.

After all the objectives have been taken and battle won. What is value of this facility? Practically nothing unless it is good for The Farm.

The Resource System is moot - MMOs like PS2 are supposed to emulate tribal warfare in their fight for territory and resources. This whole concept flies over the PS2 Devs heads.

The old PS2 Resource system was designed as rate-limiting to force-multipliers. The new resource system made it all moot since everything can now be chain-pulled.

In conclusion, what is Planetside 2? A gun/gear/weapon levelling pvp.
What drives Planetside gameplay?

Answer: Whatever is good for the farm.

That's what I meant by a systemic problem not going to be solved by telling players to take an objective or a battle rank unlock mechanics.

2) There must be better ways to create Cert sink and not destroy the whole idea of faction war and loyalty.

The whole Black Ops thing will absolutely destroy any form of longterm faction-based warfare.

Other downsides are already pointed out the official forum:
- Spying. This will be used not only for spying, but also for sabotage
- No Rivalries. This is has been pointed out correctly. There's supposed to be rivalry. For a game like this, it's unbelievably lacking. Each account is already allowed to access all empires so a player is induced to buy into each faction.

Now, they are going to allow faction switching at a push of a button, in-game. Wow. They are literally treating this like it's some lobby, queue shooter game.

Instead they can implement something that can help the overall longevity of faction warfare

Many base combinations can be tied to a specific Empire-Specific Stolen Tech lines. (If the Devs wish, they can use a more complex system of allowing blueprints/components carried/installed to and from facilities).

What's the value of the Stolen Tech Tree?
- High level Cert sink (totally separate from owning other Empire characters)
- Giving bases meaning and benefits.
- Players will queue to beneficial continent so they can pull a stolen tech gear. PS2 Devs like continental queue since it gives priority to premium members.
- Rewards faction loyalist. Before, all players are encouraged to use all 3 factions so SOE (DBG) can sell their gear 3x. But what about a one-empire-only players (such as myself). We can invest on the Stolen Tech cert lines.

An NC loyalist can fully cert towards any Vanu or TR Stolen Tech Cert trees. This is a much better alternative to just destroying any semblance of faction identity and any faction-based warfare derived from it.

If (SOE)/Daybreak is going to utilize a 'Community Council', they have to give up a percentage of their control/decision making.

I doubt they would give up even 1% of gameplay decision to the players.

It's just like the old Roadmap, which they advertised as a "Reddit-like" voting.
On paper, it has a 100% trapping of a pure, classical Greek Democracy, BUT with 0% teeth/implementation.

Basically, players can argue, debate, reason, vote, etc. but they still hold all the cards in decision making. Essentially, they've been selling this illusion that the players have a concrete voice in the game's development. But, about 3 months after the original, comprehensive Roadmap was released, it's obvious the list they made was unrealistic.

Later, I suggested they completely do away with the Roadmap (and I can't find the link..) since it's always a lose/lose scenario, but they still continued to pile on ideas

They should cut their losses with PS2 and remake the original PS1, as it was also superior in all aspects including longetivity and probably profit. (12 years to... 3?) Give the Cave/BFR people a separate server.

I'm not asking for a 1:1 copy of the original in all aspects, but it had the clearly superior gameplay.

All they would need to make it entirely F2P is a cosmetic shop. Cosmetics only. Period.

As for a potential trailer, look at some of the player's tribute videos.

Part of the non-retension of the game is/was the skill gap and the over-abundance of hackers. People were upset about BFRs/Caves as well, but BFR's were considerably nerfed since their inclusion, which people fail to remember.

They should cut their losses with PS2 and remake the original PS1, as it was also superior in all aspects including longetivity and probably profit. (12 years to... 3?) Give the Cave/BFR people a separate server.

I'm not asking for a 1:1 copy of the original in all aspects, but it had the clearly superior gameplay.

You honestly think that will happen with community relations manager making statements like "We aren't trying to bring a PS1 experience, we are trying to give you guys the tools to create gameplay experiences through strategy." {Source: 2015 Update}